§ The result
Fetcher leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Fetcher scores 37 and Cognisess 30 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Fetcher is ahead of Cognisess on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Article 11 Technical Documentation at Cognisess 25 to Fetcher 27. Customer Documentation is the widest raw gap (Cognisess 40, Fetcher 55) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Cognisess 42, Fetcher 55), 27% of the weighted advantage Fetcher builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
Vendor profile
Fetcher
AI-powered candidate sourcing and outbound recruiting platform that automates passive and active talent sourcing, personalized email outreach, and inbound applicant screening for corporate recruiting teams.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Fetcher under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Cognisess is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cognisess | Fetcher |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Fetcher 55
1.9 weighted points to Fetcher
18% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Fetcher 28
1.4 weighted points to Fetcher
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Fetcher 52
1.2 weighted points to Fetcher
8% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Fetcher 55
1.2 weighted points to Fetcher
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Fetcher 25
0.8 weighted points to Fetcher
20% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Fetcher 27
0.4 weighted points to Fetcher
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Fetcher 35
0.4 weighted points to Fetcher
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -7.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Fetcher.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Fetcher | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 28 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 55 | -15 | -1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 37 (F) | -7 | -7.3 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Cognisess | Fetcher | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Fetcher has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 19 for Fetcher, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Fetcher last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next